Olena Zelenska, wife of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, traveled to Paris France for a three-day visit December 12-14. As reported by Le Monde, “Members of the Ukrainian government will also come, including Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, and several ministers in charge of reconstruction, including Yulia Svyrydenko (economy), Oleksandr Kubrakov (infrastructure) and German Galushchenko (energy).”
Additionally, the Biden administration is trying to push congress to pass another $38 billion spending package for Ukraine to bring the total spent well over $100 billion.
If the reporting is accurate, the spending spree comes at a bad time optically, as Mrs. Zelenska’s husband Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is simultaneously asking the European Union to provide more financial support for the embattled country.
Additionally, the Biden administration is trying to push congress to pass another $38 billion spending package for Ukraine to bring the total spent well over $100 billion.
Mrs. Zelenskyy Christmas shopping in glitzy Paris stores and dropping €40,000 while her husband bangs his tin cup isn’t exactly a good look.
BREAKING: Olena Zelenska, wife of Ukrainian President Zelensky, reportedly spent €40000 on a shopping trip in Paris while visiting the country to plead for more support for Ukraine, store employees have claimed online.
L’épouse de Mr Zelensky, Olena Zelenska, de passage à Paris aujourd’hui, aurait dépensé 40000€ lors d’un passage d’1h dans un magasin de l’Avenue Montaigne… (Source fiable : Employée du magasin en question en charge de l’encaissement des clients). pic.twitter.com/LI0gebySn2
Pamela Geller was on with Joe Hoft today and discussed the US status quo today.
Pamela and Jim Hoft go way back. She reminded the listeners today of sitting with Jim at the United Nations in the mid-2000s and never imagining what we would be seeing today. She knows what it was like as a little girl in New York enjoying freedom.
Pamela was reminded of what she shared a year ago – the foundation of our country is the 1st Amendment but without free and fair elections, it’s all just gibberish.
She continued with that theme today. Pamela shared:
The people have no say and it is the opposite, the polar opposite of what this country was founded on. You see they’re acting with impunity. They’re literally without consequences. It’s power without accountability…
…We’re living in an upside down world. It’s really a morally inverted world where good is evil and evil is good. It harkens back to the Bible.
And of course, the principle of free speech, as Ayn Rand said, is not concerned with the content of a man’s speech. It doesn’t protect only the good ideas.
Geller discussed Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged, calling her arguably America’s most significant political theorist and political philosopher of the past century.
She went on to say the greatest enemy of women is feminism and that transgender people are mocking women. “We’re living in a terrible age of oppression and censorship.” America is now moving to doublespeak.
It’s really quite frightening. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society and without it a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed while his opponents are silenced. Look, that’s us…Political opinion has been designated now as hate speech.
Listen to the entire interview with one of America’s greatest thinkers today starting at the 9:00 minute mark below.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-12-16 05:37:202022-12-16 05:38:21PODCAST: ‘Freedom of Speech is the Foundation of a Free Society and Without it a Tyrant Can Wreak Havoc Unopposed While His Opponents Are Silenced’
Nuclear fusion has been pursued by researchers for years as the key to the world’s energy future. Clean, efficient, reliable, and powerful, nuclear fusion would change the world, and undercut the debate between solar and wind and fossil fuels almost overnight.
Yet for decades researchers have failed to prove that nuclear fusion can work in the real world, despite hundreds of millions (if not more) spent by governments and foundations across the world.
Now, however, scientists may have turned a corner. According to Fox Business, US scientists working out of a California laboratory “achieved a net energy gain in a fusion reaction.”
Fox Business reports:
“Scientists have been struggling since the 1950s to harness the fusion reaction that powers the sun. But no group has been able to produce more energy from the reaction than it consumes.
“Though developing fusion power stations at scale is still decades away, the breakthrough has significant implications as the world seeks to wean itself off of fossil fuels. Fusion reactions emit zero carbon and do not produce any long-lasting radioactive waste. Per The Times, a small cup of hydrogen fuel could potentially power a house for hundreds of years.
“‘If this is confirmed, we are witnessing a moment of history,’ said Dr Arthur Turrell, a plasma physicist, told the paper. ‘Scientists have struggled to show that fusion can release more energy than is put in since the 1950s, and the researchers at Lawrence Livermore seem to have finally and absolutely smashed this decades-old goal.’
“U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and under-secretary for nuclear security Jill Hruby are expected to formally announce ‘a major scientific breakthrough’ at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on Tuesday.”
The Wall Street Journal reminds us to temper our expectations, writing “what the experiment proved is that scientists can recreate the physical reactions in stars. But scaling the technology and making it commercially viable by most scientists’ accounts will likely take another few decades.”
At CFACT we remain sober about the scientific and engineering challenges facing the development of nuclear fusion technology.
Nonetheless, the potential of this safe, clean, endlessly abundant energy source could change everything.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Committee For A Constructive Tomorrowhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCommittee For A Constructive Tomorrow2022-12-16 05:09:362022-12-16 06:52:43Harnessing The Power Of The Stars—A Step Closer
A federal judge in Texas blocked the Biden administration from scrapping the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” policy Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a pause on the Biden administration’s decision to end the program, according to the judge’s order. The policy forces certain illegal immigrants to return to Mexico as they await court proceedings.
The Supreme Court ruled in June that the Biden administration can terminate the policy, which was formally lifted in August.
“As Secretary Mayorkas has said, MPP has endemic flaws, imposes unjustifiable human costs, and pulls resources and personnel away from other priority efforts to secure our border,” the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said at the time.
The Biden administration initially tried to end the policy on the president’s first day in office, but was quickly met lawsuits led by Republican states.
The decision comes as federal border authorities encounter overwhelming levels of illegal immigration, with a record more than 2.3 million migrants encountered in fiscal year 2022 and even more expected with the end of another Trump-era expulsion policy, Title 42, expected on Dec. 21.
A former manager at Twitter, convicted of spying for Saudi Arabia, was sentenced to 3.5 years in prison on Wednesday, U.S. prosecutors said.
Ahmad Abouammo, who provided a Saudi official with user information in exchange for a $42,000 watch and a pair of $100,000 wire transfers, received 3.5 years in prison despite prosecutors originally pushing for seven years, according to Reuters. Abouammo was found guilty of spying and money laundering on behalf of the Saudi Arabian government, and using his position at Twitter to acquire information about Twitter users for the Saudi Royal Family in August.
The max sentencing was up to “decades” in prison, but prosecutors were pushing for seven years to “deter others in the technology and social media industry from selling out the data of vulnerable users,” according to Reuters. Abouammo’s attorneys requested a probationary sentence at his home in Seattle with no prison time.
During the August trial, prosecutor Eric Cheng said “they paid for a mole” during his closing argument, noting that Abouammo was paid in bribes three times his salary. “We all know that kind of money is not for nothing,” he said.
Abuoammo managed media for high-profile users in the Middle East and North Africa for Twitter. Abuoammo was arrested in 2019 in Seattle, but was set free on bail until the trial in San Francisco.
Abuoammo’s attorneys noted that he was dealing with financial trouble while at Twitter, saying that he had been “struggling to pay for and deal with serious upheavals in his sister’s life,” which included medical care for her newborn daughter, according to Reuters.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-12-15 15:31:182022-12-15 15:34:15Ex-Twitter Manager Slapped With Three-Year Prison Sentence For Spying For Saudi Arabia
If Elon Musk won’t suppress the news, CBS, ABC, and NBC News are more than happy to. While the Twitter files continue to drip out damning evidence of the company’s pre-Musk bias, three of America’s biggest outlets refuse to cover the story that’s riveting people the world over. In an ironic twist, the media is so beholden to Big Tech that it is suppressing a story about suppression. But don’t think the truth won’t get out, Congressman Pat Fallon (R-Texas) warns. The GOP is weeks away from House control, and no amount of coordinated media blackouts will protect Silicon Valley then.
“Get ready for Republican oversight” was the message of incoming soon-to-be committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.). Like the rest of his conservative colleagues, he’s ready to dive into the last two years of criminal mismanagement under Democratic rule — on everything from the border and COVID to Afghanistan, energy, and Hunter Biden. But this latest wrinkle, this proof of widescale, devastating, conservative censorship will be priority #1.
Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) may have been unsurprised by the revelations at Twitter, but he’s outraged nonetheless. “…[O]ur worst fears and suspicions have been confirmed,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch.” “Really. I mean, you had the head of their legal department, Vijaya Gadde, admitting that the FBI told him, ‘Hey, listen, you’re going to get probably a hack and leak story in October dealing with Hunter Biden. So just be aware of that and take action.’ That’s very troubling.” Add that to the suspicions that Google “magically” made 70% of GOP campaign emails redirect into spam, and Fallon warns that this is a much bigger, more sinister problem than people realize.
“Now we’ve confirmed that Twitter, I suspect Facebook, and other Big Tech firms are doing the same thing. We’ll get them under oath, because they claim that they’re not biased — which I find laughable, being that I’ve been… a victim of their shadow-banning for years. So let’s ask them… and see what they say. And if they want to commit perjury, well, then, they’re going to have to pay the consequences — and then they might do a perp walk after all.”
Perkins pointed out that while Twitter might be a private company, “they’ve become the public square. … They’re like a public utility… like a telephone company. And can you imagine the telephone company refusing to do service with one person because they don’t like their politics? But that’s essentially what we have with Big Tech.” And worse, he explained, since the Biden administration was colluding with these platforms to squelch “disinformation.”
“If you’re on the government clock,” Fallon argued, “… and using taxpayer resources to meddle in politics and campaigning — you’re breaking federal law. And it seems to us [from] what we’ve uncovered thus far, that’s exactly what went on. That’s why another [reason] we need to call some of these former executives and current executives of Big Tech [before Congress and ask], ‘Have government officials [been] pressuring you and telling you to edit political free speech?’”
Asked if Twitter violated election laws, the Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky, who served on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) from 2006-2007, replied, “The answer to that is yes.” But, he told Perkins, “In September of last year, the Federal Election Commission, which has authority over investigating violations of our federal campaign finance laws, actually dismissed complaints that have been filed against Twitter — not only for shadow-banning Republican elected officials and candidates, but also for suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story.”
Twitter executives claimed they hadn’t coordinated with the Biden campaign. But also, von Spakovsky, explained, Jack Dorsey’s team insisted they had “a bona fide commercial reason for suppressing the Hunter Biden story, which was their internal policy against publishing hacked materials.” But now that we know they were lying, the FEC needs “to reopen that file, reconsider the case, and potentially make criminal referrals to the Justice Department for any Twitter executives who committed perjury in their testimony to the FEC,” he insisted. After all, it’s “a potential violation of campaign finance law,” the former commissioner pointed out.
The lawyers who filed the original complaints need to go back to the FEC and say, “You might need to reconsider your decision to close the file based on this newly uncovered evidence,” von Spakovsky urged. At the end of the day, the FEC has civil authority, “so they can impose fines and … penalties on anyone violating campaign finance laws, including a corporation.”
In the meantime, expect an intense, in-depth investigation of Twitter and all of the social media platforms suspected of cracking down on conservative or politically inconvenient messaging. “This is the best $44 billion I’ve seen spent in my lifetime,” Fallon insisted. “I mean, thank you, Elon Musk. It’s like the Wizard of Oz, and he’s pulled back the curtain, and we find that all of our suspicions have been confirmed.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2022-12-15 15:12:252022-12-15 15:20:14Musk’s Twitter Buy ‘The Best $44 Billion I’ve Seen Spent in My Lifetime’: Congressman
While I used to quip before the millennium’s turn that “I’m a real man of the ’90s — the 1890s,” the truth is that I’m more like Mayberry Meets the Middle Ages.
It’s not so much that I hate new ideas (insofar as such things exist) or love old ideas, but that I yearn for eternal ideas. I thus very well could turn back the clock to the days of chivalry, when virtue was exalted and “values” (the term) unknown, faith was fact and “atheism” (the term) unheard, and “equality” was applied only to weights and measures. But while I could, I can’t. This brings me to the matter of women and the draft.
At a gathering a couple of years ago, a young man, about age 20, registered surprise when I told him women didn’t have to sign up for Selective Service. His reaction was no surprise: Marinated in Equality Dogma growing up, he probably couldn’t imagine that the greatest sacrifice one could be required to make — to possibly have to shed blood for his country — is demanded of only one sex.
This could possibly change, as there has been a recent effort to require draft registration of women as well. Conservatives have generally opposed this, unsurprisingly, with the very good congressman Chip Roy (R-Tex.) becoming especially incensed at the notion. My medieval self sympathizes, too; I very much believe that shedding blood, whether your own or others’, is man’s work.
But there’s a problem with this: Equality™.
In its name we’ve denuded our civilization of traditions and moral standards. All-male clubs and even military academies, such as the Citadel and VMI, were compelled to become coed. Women had to be allowed in police and fire departments, with physical standards dumbed down (equality?) to facilitate this. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) was made more “girl friendly” because boys scored higher on it, and women were offered affirmative action to equalize their numbers in various endeavors.
All this was done to indignant, self-righteous cries of “equality!” with those defending tradition called sexist, misogynist and discriminatory. Yet this selective preference, which some sloppily call a principle, has been used cynically.
There’s much talk about the intersex pay gap (whose “injustice” has been debunked), but little about the intersex death gap (men constitute 92 percent of workplace fatalities). When female soccer players complained and litigated because they didn’t earn as much the men, they ended up getting half the latter’s World Cup money (even after losing to unpaid14-year-old boys). Yet no one ever talks about equalizing fashion industry pay, even though female models earn substantially more.
Title IX was used to mandate proportionality in college sports; meaning, if a student body is 60 percent female (not unheard of now), 60 percent of its athletes must also be. The result was that men’s teams were eliminated to facilitate women’s teams’ creation. Yet if “proportionality” is such an imperative, why isn’t it applied to college admissions in the first place so that the student-body sex ratio is approximately 50-50? Isn’t academics more important than athletics?
We hear endless complaints about how there aren’t enough female scientists, engineers, politicians, upper-end managers and CEOs, but none about the dearth of female oil rig workers, garbage collectors, masons, landscapers and pipe fitters. If a young girl wants to be on a boys’ sports team, all that’s asked is if she’s good enough, with “Equality!” used to cow those who object. Yet no boy, even the young lad she may be displacing, can try out for a girls’ team even if he’s more than good enough.
The conclusion is plain: Equality appeals are ploy, not principle. The tactic is used by feminists (and others) to get what they want when they want it. It’s trotted out when what can be had are benefits, not burdens; authority, not responsibility; rewards, not risks. This means that it’s not about equality at all, but power, prestige, position and pocketbook.
So now we return to the draft. Back when society truly was patriarchal (at least somewhat), there was a congruence: Men’s greater authority was attended by greater responsibility. They were the only ones who could vote prior to women’s suffrage but, if the politicians they elected got them into a war, they were also the ones who had to fight that war. They had skin in the game.
Men still have that skin in the game. They now have no greater authority, however, as the equality ploy has been used selectively to further a politically correct brand of inequality. It’s a perversion of chivalry: Men are disadvantaged by an unlevel domestic playing field but are still expected to, when necessary, do the bleeding on the battlefield.
The point here should be obvious. To twist a famous saying, the best way to get a bad professed social standard eliminated is to apply it strictly. If people really believe in “equality,” they should strenuously seek its application across the board. But if they find such a prospect unworkable, it discredits the pseudo-principle — and they should then scrap it altogether.
And, ironically, it’s mainly conservatives who require this soul-searching. Many leftists have already dispensed with the equality pretense and moved on to “equity,” a more overt, aggressive iteration of the equality-ploy-enabled woke discrimination. This, though, is actually par for the course. As G.K. Chesterton observed in 1924:
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. …Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob.
The good news is that “equality” could be replaced with that infinitely superior, timeless model: the virtues (e.g., Justice, Charity, Prudence). The bad news is that civilizational collapse is likely necessary for this to happen. The norm today is to be wed to Equality Dogma, and what society calls fairness is too often just a species of agreed-upon illusions. In our relativistic, emotion-driven time, people will continue enforcing woke double standards and men’s second-class status, and often not even notice, while professing equality all the way — because it feels right. The girls get what the girls want.
As for me, whether it’s the draft, men claiming female status (“trans”) taking women’s sporting titles or something else, I won’t play the white knight riding to the rescue. I’ll save that for a time and place where knights are, once again, revered.
Addendum: Earlier this year, the Babylon Bee satirized the equality ruse brilliantly with the apropos video below.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Selwyn Dukehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSelwyn Duke2022-12-15 14:42:312022-12-15 14:42:31Isn’t Drafting Women an Imperative of Equality?
Since its founding, the abortion industry has always targeted minority and economically disadvantaged women as its prime sources of profit. Today, this anti-life narrative often takes the form of arguing that protecting life in the womb will exacerbate the nation’s maternal mortality crisis — a lie that a bogus new study from Boston University and the Commonwealth Fund attempts to perpetuate.
In the study, titled “The U.S. Maternal Health Divide,” the researchers claim that passing pro-life laws in the states will lead to an increase in maternal mortality and the disintegration of existing maternal health care. The legacy media wasted no time in elevating the report, with outlets like The Hill writing, “The new findings from The Commonwealth Fund confirm what many advocates feared: scrapping Roe v. Wade would have a disproportionate impact on women of color and worsen maternal health overall.”
The pro-abortion narrative is set — the only problem? The study doesn’t actually provide evidence or statistically significant data backing up the claim that protecting life in the womb augments maternal mortality. Rather, the study attempts to correlate the pre-Dobbs maternal and infant mortality rates between 2018 and 2020 with where the state laws now stand on protecting life in the womb in a post-Roe America.
One glaringly obvious issue with the narrative portrayed by this study is that under Roe v. Wade, no state had the ability to enforce a meaningful protection for life in the womb prior to viability. This means that during the period studied, practically speaking, the states now enforcing pro-life protections were indistinguishable from the states that currently allow abortion through 40 weeks of pregnancy.
Furthermore, during the three-year period studied, 20 of the 26 pro-life states reported at least a one-year increase in abortions, with several seeing increases across both years. If abortion were negatively correlated to maternal mortality, then an increase in abortion would cause a decrease in maternal mortality; however, increased rates of abortion in states that are now pro-life did nothing to alleviate the maternal mortality crisis in these states.
The study ignores regions such as our nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., where women are almost twice as likely to die from pregnancy complications as mothers in the rest of the nation. The city also maintains one of the most liberal abortion laws in the United States; an abortionist in D.C. can kill a child in the womb at any point in pregnancy, and the abortionist does not need to be a doctor. The D.C. Abortion Fund directly finances abortions for abortion-minded mothers who struggle financially. If abortion were the solution to maternal mortality, why does unlimited abortion fail to remedy the maternal mortality crisis in areas like D.C.?
The answer, of course, is that killing a child in the womb is not a valid solution to any problem — nor is pregnancy itself the problem when addressing maternal mortality. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that 63.2% of all pregnancy-related deaths are preventable. Treating abortion as the solution to the maternal mortality crisis is a waste of time, money, and energy that would be far better directed to addressing real disparities in human flourishing.
For example, limited access to convenient and quality health care plays a major role in whether a woman is healthy before, during, and after her pregnancy. The Commonwealth Fund study attempts to characterize abortion as a solution to maternity care deserts. Of the 26 pro-life states analyzed, the majority are predominately rural, making the solution to a maternity care desert much more complex than simply opening a new hospital. Innovative medical resources, like telehealth services and mobile maternity care units, would go a long way in addressing the maternal health care disparities that abortion attempts to camouflage.
Likewise, abortion is not the solution to poverty. Nine of the top 10 states with the highest poverty rate in the country are states with pro-life protections in place. Poverty often predicts a mother’s ability to access quality health insurance, healthy food, and pharmaceutical resources. In these instances, mothers require assistance to access the resources needed to experience a healthy pregnancy and postpartum lifestyle — not abortion.
A quick glance under the hood of the Commonwealth Fund study reveals the major logical leaps that a reader must make in order to accept the claim that pro-life laws increase maternal mortality. Beneath the misleading pro-abortion framing, however, the report holds some truth: our nation really is suffering from a maternal mortality crisis. But one must only look around the abortion propaganda to recognize that telling poor and minority women that their safest pregnancy outcome is to kill their child is not a real solution.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2022-12-15 14:23:312022-12-15 14:25:08Killing Unborn Children Will Never Solve Maternal Mortality
With the explosive phenomenon of gender dysphoria continuing to ripple across America’s youth, a related but much less highlighted trend is simultaneously occurring — a movement almost completely ignored by the mainstream media. New studies are now emerging showing that the “detransitioner” movement is far larger than what is commonly acknowledged, with detransition rates nearing 30% in some instances.
The phenomenon of “gender dysphoria” (the condition of being mentally distressed due to a perceived mismatch between one’s gender identity and one’s biological sex) has seen a colossal increase among children in the United States over the last five years. A recent investigation by Reuters found that a minimum of 121,882 minors in the U.S. between the ages of 6-17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria between 2017 and 2021, while admitting that this is probably an “undercount.” In 2021 alone, they tallied 42,167 diagnoses, an almost 70% increase from the previous year.
But thousands of young women and men who once identified as the opposite sex — many of whom attempted a “gender transition” by ingested drugs and undergoing elaborate surgical procedures to impersonate the opposite sex — are now rejecting the transgender identity and are once again embracing their natural sex.
As reported by The Post Millennial, new studies are showing that the rate of individuals who detransition away from a trans identity is occurring at paces that far exceed what the legacy media is reporting. At the Re/Detrans Canada event held at York University in Ontario last month, researchers presented a number of studies that showed detransition rates ranging from 2% to almost 30%. Three other studies from England show rates between 6.9% and 9.8%. Another yet to be published study of 774 young Canadians and Americans revealed that 16% had halted gender transition treatments, citing “health concerns, change in identity, and cost.”
These rates contrast sharply with the “less than 1%” rate that is constantly trotted out by transgender activists and the media. As noted by The Post Millennial, other cultural indicators also point to a swelling detransitioner movement. Reddit, an online discussion forum that in early 2022 was the 9th-most-visited website in the world, has a “Detrans” chatroom (or “Subreddit”) which currently has over 40,000 members.
Online accounts and testimonies of young women and men who have detransitioned from pursuing a gender transition opposite from their biological sex have exploded in the last five years, and distinct similarities are emerging from among many of these testimonies. While the causes for gender dysphoria are often complex and multifaceted, cultural and institutional influences beholden to a pro-transgender ideology have become primary contributors to the confusion over biological sex that is occurring among thousands of adolescents.
Here is a sampling of 20 testimonies from among the hundreds of detransitioners who have publicly shared their stories. The power that social media has to shape the minds of young people who have experienced abuse and are looking for affirmation is readily apparent in these accounts, along with the potent influence that medical and psychiatric professionals have in pushing their young patients down a path of gender transition drugs and surgical procedures that often create irreversible physiological harm.
Daisy Strongin spent seven years from age 15 to 22 attempting to transition from female to male. It began when she immersed herself on the internet due to depression from low self-esteem. “Chances are the kid who is spending 14 hours a day on the internet probably doesn’t have a lot of in-real-life friends, and so they probably feel alienated. I mean, that’s how I felt,” she said. She soon discovered the world of “genderqueer” and “gender fluidity” on social media sites and began closely following “trans influencers.” Strongin began getting testosterone injections and eventually underwent a double mastectomy. Soon, however, she began feeling remorse for her decision. “It just got so hard to look in the mirror because I felt more of a disconnect between my mind and my body than I did before,” she said. “I felt like I was in some kind of weird gender purgatory.” She now rejects gender theory and gender identity, calling it “a scam.” Strongin is now 24 and newly married with an infant son.
KC Miller began taking testosterone at 16 and underwent a double mastectomy only six months after starting the injections. She says that she was introduced to gender ideology through influencers on YouTube. After noticing that the testosterone treatments were causing severe hair loss, she decided to detransition. She now admits that “social contagion” played a role in convincing her to transition. “The more detransitioners that speak out, the more that will feel comfortable to come forward,” Miller says. “We’re going to see a huge wave.”
Chloe Cole went on puberty blockers and testosterone at just 13 years old. She had been diagnosed with autism and ADHD at age 7 and spent a lot of unsupervised time online, where she was exposed to gender ideology. When she began questioning her gender identity, she was fast-tracked by medical personnel into transitioning, and her parents were pressured to sign off on it. She underwent a double mastectomy at 13 and still suffers medical complications to this day five years later. Cole soon came to regret her decision and has now become a spokesperson to advocate for protecting children from undergoing transition procedures. She also launched a support group for detransitioners called Detrans United.
Helena Kerschner struggled with “depression, isolation, self-harm, an eating disorder, and suicidal thoughts” as a young teen. At 13, she was exposed to gender ideology through Tumblr. At 18 she began taking testosterone and soon began having fits of uncontrollable anger, eventually resorting to going to a psych unit where she was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder and psychosis. Seventeen months later, she decided to stop taking testosterone, and her symptoms immediately stopped. Kerschner noted that no medical professionals suggested that the hormones could be causing the symptoms.
Camille Kiefel experienced a traumatic event in her childhood, and she subsequently felt uncomfortable and vulnerable as a female and desired to look more androgynous. After being exposed to gender identity ideology in college, she began to identify as nonbinary, but not as transgender. “I struggled with severe mental illness and suicidal ideation,” she says. After only two appointments with mental health workers, they recommended she receive a double mastectomy. The procedure caused her to suffer from acute distress, and she is now suing the health care professionals for what she calls an “abhorrent misdiagnosis.” “I just don’t want what happened to me to happen to someone else,” she says.
Grace Lidinsky-Smith described a euphoric feeling when she started taking testosterone. She soon went ahead and also had both of her breasts removed. But afterward, she described having “intense, suicidal despair.” She eventually stopped taking hormones and started using her birth name again. “It became important to just accept myself as myself,” she said.
Cat Cattinson began taking hormones and described it as “one of the better antidepressants I had taken.” But after three months, her voice dropped dramatically. “Nothing was coming out except air and squeaks,” she said. She soon stopped going to social events and singing onstage, which had previously been one of her passions. After believing that transitioning would solve her depression, she soon discovered that it actually made it worse. Cattinson was able to find an online community of detransitioners and stopped taking hormones.
Keira Bell grew up in a troubled home in the U.K. and didn’t have very many friends in her adolescent years. She decided she wanted to be a boy at 15, but what she says was really going on was that she was “insecure in my body who had experienced parental abandonment, felt alienated from my peers, suffered from anxiety and depression, and struggled with my sexual orientation.” She went to a National Health Service clinic, which put her on puberty blockers at 16, testosterone at 17, and a double mastectomy at 20. “I was an unhappy girl who needed help,” she writes. “Instead, I was treated like an experiment.” After deciding to detransition, she sued the NHS clinic that treated her and won her case.
KathyGrace Duncan grew up in an abusive household and began to believe it was “unsafe” to be a woman. She began taking hormones at age 19 in the early 1980s and changed her name to Keith. Eleven years later, she was challenged by a fellow churchgoer and decided to start detransitioning. Duncan now works as a women’s ministry leader to help women reclaim their femininity in a time of identity crisis in our culture. “It’s time for women to break the mold. We don’t have to look feminine, we just need to draw it out,” she explains.
Walt Heyer was dressed in girls’ clothes as a four-year-old boy repeatedly by his grandmother. He was later sexually abused by his uncle, which made him not want to be male. He would cross-dress and wish he was a girl. As an adult, he began living two separate lives as a married man and as a cross-dresser. He eventually decided to undergo both top and bottom gender transition surgery at age 40, and his marriage soon ended. After eight years of living as a woman, he found himself still distressed about his gender identity. He eventually got counseling for his emotional trauma and received healing. He detransitioned at age 50 and now provides support to other detransitioners through numerous authored books and his com ministry.
Elle Palmer had a traumatic online sexual experience as a young teen which she says greatly shook her confidence and self-worth. She started taking testosterone when she was 16 but started losing her hair, and soon decided to stop. “If I had been going to a good therapist, if I had been going to school, if I had had friends and had meaningful relationships with people outside of the internet, I know that I would have been able to reconcile my female identity with myself the way that I was,” she says. “I was just living so disconnected from my body and so disconnected from who I really was.”
Luka Hein suffered from mental health issues at age 15 in which she experienced discomfort with her body. A therapist encouraged her to come out as transgender, and by 16 she underwent a double mastectomy. Her parents had been told that she was at high risk of suicide if she did not transition. She has also undergone changes to her voice and body as a result of hormones. Now 20, she regrets listening to the doctors, who she says manipulated and misled her into irreversible damage to her body.
Laura Becker was diagnosed with a developmental disorder as a child, which today falls under the autism spectrum. She was also “verbally, emotionally, and psychologically” abused. She began having social anxiety and attempted suicide. She also began viewing pornography, which gave her a “misogynistic view of women.” She began identifying as “genderqueer” after finding influencers on the social media site Tumblr. A psychiatrist diagnosed her with gender dysphoria after only two visits and said she was of “sound mind” to get a double mastectomy. She also began taking testosterone which “escalat[ed] her feelings of desperation and hopelessness.” She came to regret her decision and is disappointed with the medical guidance she received. “There is a lot of bad therapy out there,” she says.
Abel Garcia was raised by his grandparents and says he “didn’t have a male role model in my family.” The transient lifestyle he grew up with made it difficult to make friends. He learned about transgenderism on social media. When he came out to his parents, his father forced him to see a prostitute to “cure” him. The experience traumatized him. He saw a therapist and was “astounded at how quickly his therapist affirmed him as transgender, despite his mixed feelings.” He began taking estrogen and had breasts surgically implanted on his chest. Three months later, he realized he had made a mistake. He has since suffered from a plethora of health complications as a result of taking estrogen. “We should obviously give people the actual help that they need, instead of affirming this illusion that they have and that we are feeding to them,” he said.
Laura Beth Perry Smalts believed she was a man born in a woman’s body and felt she “just needed to fix the body.” She began to take male hormones and underwent a double mastectomy and hysterectomy. She later regretted her decision and married a man. She is now “deeply troubled by the lack of medical oversight and the ease with which young people are able to obtain opposite-sex hormones and surgeries.” “It’s so maddening when I look back. … Where were the doctors willing to say, ‘Hey, wait for a second, this is really not good for your body?’” she asks.
Dagny began experiencing gender dysphoria when she was around 12 after experiencing discomfort with her developing body. She was heavily influenced by people she met on social media who encouraged her to identify as trans. According to LifeSiteNews, “she no longer wishes to ‘transition, and is distressed that other young people with gender dysphoria think they have no other choice. ‘It’s time to change that,’ she said. ‘It’s time that we become aware of how much pain and negativity this narrative is causing.’”
Michelle Alleva experienced intense bullying at school as a child, and the trauma led to very low self-esteem. She began to find community online at places like Tumblr, where she connected with an LGBT community. After initially identifying as asexual, she developed feelings of wanting to change her body, and she received constant reassurance online that she should begin a gender transition. She started testosterone at age 20 and underwent a double mastectomy two years later. After an initial mental high, she soon began experiencing intense depression. She was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Three years later during the pandemic, she experienced a breakthrough and realized that her transgender identity was not solving her mental health problems and began to detransition.
Arianna Armour was adopted by Christian parents and went to church every Sunday, but faith did not take hold in her life, and she began to identify as a lesbian at age seven. She spent the next 14 years identifying that way before spending two years identifying as transgender. She had lost her faith and was suffering from depression and drug addiction. She was invited to come back to church in 2019 and decided to let go of her transgender identity after spending time in prayer and reading Scripture. “It all came down to a choice,” she says. “I decided to follow Christ.”
Samuel Jordan grew up in a Christian household and dreamed of becoming a pastor. But he was sexually abused by a friend’s family member at age eight. After repeated abuse, he began exploring homosexuality as an adolescent. After a broken relationship with his mother who passed away soon after and his father moving in with another woman, Samuel found solace in the homosexual community, and soon began identifying as a woman and received breast implants. But after dropping out of college, he needed a place to stay and was taken in by a friend on the condition that he return to church. After experiencing a reconversion during a church service, he detransitioned and had the implants removed. “God told me ‘You just gotta say yes, and I’m going to show you that I am God enough to fix it,’” he says.
Jeffrey McCall was bullied as a child, and by age 15 was living a homosexual lifestyle. When his relationships with other men ended and left him unfulfilled, he turned to drug abuse to cope. Eventually his inner turmoil led to him taking on a transgender identity as “Scarlet.” This led to a continued pattern of promiscuity with other men and performing at drag shows. He eventually came into contact with two mentors, a college professor, and a pastor, who encouraged him in his faith journey, despite continuing to live a double life outside of church. One night, he broke down and asked God, “Will I ever live for you?” He heard God reply, “Yes, you will live for me.” McCall soon gave up his transgender and homosexual lifestyle. “It was a lot to handle,” he says. “I had to explain to people that it wasn’t about becoming ‘straight.’ It was a choice not to follow sin. The alcoholic, transgender, homosexual, prescription drug life I had was not what God had created me for.”
For more information, here is a list of websites of detransitioner advocacy groups and communities:
Post Trans – “A collection of detrans stories from female detransitioners and desisters”
Detrans Voices – “A community resource created for, by, and about people who have detransitioned and/or desisted from transgender self-identification”
Detrans United – “A group of former transgender-identifying youth and adults who have come together to voice our dissent against ‘gender affirming care,’ influence policy, and provide a network of support for detransitioners”
Detrans Foundation – “Therapy for detransitioners, desisters & people experiencing transition regret”
Sex Change Regret – “Take back your life. Others have, you can too.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2022-12-15 12:44:102022-12-16 05:29:19Under the Radar, the Detransitioner Movement Is Surging
Killing 270 people isn’t enough to merit the death penalty.
The predictable coda to the Lockerbie bomber being turned over is that he’ll get a nice prison retirement plan with full medical and dental. Killing 270 people isn’t enough to merit the death penalty.
A federal magistrate judge ordered the suspect in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, to be held without bond and scheduled hearings to assign a defense lawyer and determine whether he should remain in custody until trial.
Abu Agila Mohammad Masud Kheir Al-Marimi, 71, is charged with making the bomb that destroyed the plane and faces three federal charges of destroying an aircraft or vehicle used in foreign commerce resulting in death. The Justice Department announced Sunday that Masud was in custody.
Resulting in the deaths of 259 people.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of life in prison or the death penalty and a $250,000 fine. But Assistant U.S. Attorney Erik Kenerson said because the death penalty was not available in 1988, the government would not pursue that penalty if Masud is convicted.
That’s a nonsensical argument.
The Warren court claiming that the death penalty was unconstitutional was, in any case, a response to the specific implementation in 1972. It became constitutional again in 1976. The federal death penalty was only formally reinstated in 1988 in the sense of legal codes, but all of this is beside the point since Al-Marimi is not an American citizen, he’s a foreign enemy terrorist.
Ex parte Quirin settled this already. The Bush administration however failed to properly implement it. The constitution vested the authority to “define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations.” That’s what international Islamic terrorism is.
But the Biden administration, which halted the federal death penalty, and is part of a radical faction that worked to destroy the War on Terror and enable Islamic terrorism can hardly be expected to do anything else except perpetuate their treasons.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-12-15 09:37:382022-12-15 09:40:14Biden’s Handlers Won’t Seek Death Penalty for Muslim Terrorist Who Killed 270 People
Elon Musk since his acquisition of Twitter has been on a mission to clean house.
First he, like a good businessman, started by eliminating a bloated, and biased, staff.
Second he purged “bots”, software application that ran automated tasks (scripts) over Twitter, usually with the intent to imitate human activity, from the Twitter platform.
Thirdly, he systematically began to review and reinstate those who had been banned for the simple reason that the former owner, and his minions, did not like or agree with their political views.
Since the Twitter acquisition Musk has had four primary goals:
Make freedom of speech a priority on the Twitter platform.
Remove any and all twitter accounts that promote the trafficking of underaged children, and/or promote child pornography, and remove pedophiles and pederasts from the platform.
Reveal conversations of Twitter employees and thereby exposed the lack of any rational to ban President Donald J. Trump, and those who supported him for president, from the platform.
Show clearly how Twitter specifically impacted the 2020 presidential election.
Now that Elon has accomplished these four goals he has set his sights on exposing those who provided a false narrative on Covid the disease and Covid vaccinations.
Here’s a tweet on what the Covidnistas think about his efforts.
Twitter CEO Elon Musk took a jab at Dr. Anthony Fauci in a tweet Sunday as Republicans have threatened to investigate Fauci’s knowledge of gain-of-function research related to coronaviruses that his department funded.
Fauci is stepping down from his role as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases after five decades.
Musk tweeted Sunday that his pronouns are “prosecute/Fauci.”
Fauci has been the subject of potential investigations, which could happen when Republicans take control of the House in January. Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul has threatened a wave of oversight, ranging from whether the coronavirus leaked from a lab, whether the virus was funded in part by gain-of-function research, and whether members of the FDA received royalties from the companies that created the coronavirus vaccine.
Elon’s success in accomplishing his goals has been stunning and has drawn the ire of liberals, socialists, homosexuals, the legacy media, Biden and his administration, and the Democrat party.
QUESTION: Why?
ANSWER: His war on the “woke mind virus.”
The woke mind virus is either defeated or nothing else matters
Elon gets it right. The real virus infecting America and the world is Wokevid 2021. Since the inauguration of Biden in January 2021, he and the Democrats in Congress have been focused on the destruction of the American dream.
Musk said,
“This is the time to think about the future, and also to ask, is it right to infringe upon people’s rights as what is happening right now? If somebody wants to stay in the house that’s great, they should be allowed to stay in the house and they should not be compelled to leave. But to say that they cannot leave their house, and they will be arrested if they do, this is fascist.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-12-15 08:36:252022-12-15 14:33:42Elon Musk vs. The Branch Covidians and Anthony Fauci
Stephen P. White: Being a father is an unmerited chance to participate in the love of God the Father. A chance to be a glass through which, however darkly, children can glimpse Him.
There’s no shortage of conversations these days about men and masculinity. Everyone seems to be wondering: “What’s up with men?” From transgender debates, to the Me-Too movement, to concerns about the economic and marital prospects of young men (especially working-class men) and the political implications of their plight, our culture is saturated with questions having to do with masculinity. Lots of questions, lots of debate, but not a lot of answers.
There are those who treat masculinity as a mere construct, devoid of any essential content. The only purpose of masculinity – not an essential purpose, mind you, but a practical purpose – is to assert power in the interests of some oppressor class. The strong dominate the weak. The jocks bully the nerds in high school. Macho guys mistreat and condescend to women. You get the idea.
Then there are those who, often in defiance against the aforementioned claims of toxicity, assert masculinity as a collection of particular physical or psychological traits: physical strength, assertiveness, confidence, discipline, leadership, stoicism, dominance, competitiveness, and so on. Follow this line of thinking far enough, though, and the sum of the parts inevitably proves less than the whole. Masculinity-as-lifestyle-choice is no more interesting a subject than masculinity as a tool of patriarchal oppression.
To be fair, neither of these views is entirely mistaken. Men actually have taken advantage of certain strengths and social advantages to mistreat women. And there are certain traits and qualities that are and ought to be associated with masculinity – just as there are certain behaviors and qualities which are decidedly “unmanly.”
Now, like most men I know (at least those I consider good examples of what it means to be men), I don’t actually spend very much time thinking about what it means to be “manly” or worrying about masculinity. The truth is, I generally find discussions about masculinity to be somewhat tedious and overwrought.
As it happens, I was invited last month to speak to a group of university students – mostly young men – on the topic of “healthy masculinity.” So, I took a break from my long-standing habit of not thinking about “healthy masculinity,” to consider what nuggets of wisdom or insight I might be able to offer these young men. I came up with three points.
First: As far as I can tell, after a lot of thought, healthy masculinity is just what happens when a man lives virtuously. That’s it. A virtuous man, by the fact of being virtuous, lives his masculinity in a healthy way. (I mean, it’s right there in the root of the word “virtue,” from the Latin virtus, which refers to those qualities proper to a vir, a man.)
This might sound overly simplistic, even circular, but it isn’t. Notice that the converse is not always true. Not everyone who strives for “healthy masculinity” as a goal will live virtuously. If we want healthy masculinity, aim to teach young men virtue: the rest will take care of itself. But if we tell young men they must exhibit “healthy masculinity” and then fail to instruct them in real virtue, we’re setting them up for confusion and failure.
Second: Fatherhood makes the man. There’s no worthwhile conception of masculinity which does not have fatherhood as its primary reference. Obviously, not all men live their fatherhood in a biological capacity. But all men, without exception, are made for fatherhood. I know celibate priests who are tremendous fathers. I know married men without children of their own, or with adopted children, who are tremendous fathers. It is for good reason that St. Joseph is the patron of fathers.
Whatever physical or moral strength is in a man, it is his so that he might be of better service to those entrusted to his care. This is demonstrated starkly in the breach: there is nothing less manly, nothing more utterly antithetical to fatherhood, than a man who takes advantage of, abuses, or mistreats women and children.
Third point: Fatherhood is a terminal condition. Like all true vocations, fatherhood finds its fulfillment in paying out one’s life in service to others. A father loves unconditionally, even as he knows that he will diminish as his children increase and grow. But fatherhood is about more than self-sacrifice.
Most of us learn about fatherhood first from our own fathers. As children, we learn our fathers are invincible, omniscient, omnipotent, awesome, all-loving. (No one Mom looks at the way she looks at Dad could be anything less!) As we get older, we learn better. We grow out of this view of our fathers. We learn that our fathers are – we hope – very good men, they’re still just ordinary men. Fallible, flawed, mortal.
Then as men (I’m speaking here to the men), we become fathers ourselves, and the view of fatherhood shifts again. If my Dad wasn’t perfect, Lord knows neither am I! But my own little child doesn’t know that. Not yet.
And then it begins to sink in. That first childish image of Fatherhood – invincible, omniscient, omnipotent, awesome, all-loving – that’s real Fatherhood. I may be a dim, poor reflection of it. But that doesn’t mean it’s not real. There really is a Father like that. I’ve known that love. More amazingly, despite all my inadequacies, imperfections, and selfishness, He’s allowed me to taste just a hint of what it is to love the way He does. And He’s allowed me, called me, to show a glimpse of that love to my own children. It’s humbling, and not a little terrifying.
That’s what I mean by Fatherhood is a terminal condition. Fatherhood is not just “unto death.” It’s aimed at something; it’s headed somewhere. It points to Someone who isn’t me. It’s an unmerited chance to participate in the love of God the Father. A chance to be, for someone else, a glass through which, however darkly, they can glimpse Him. It’s humbling and not a little terrifying, and wondrous beyond measure.
Stephen P. White is executive director of The Catholic Project at The Catholic University of America and a fellow in Catholic Studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
It has been announced that the New Cambridge Dictionary definition of a Woman is, “A person who lives and acts as a female.” Cambridge now defines “man” as “an adult who lives and identifies as male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.”
This is the dictionary commonly used in postsecondary education.
What WOKE LGBTQMxyz garbage — in case you aren’t familiar with the acronym; attached are some definitions.
Here’s some additional info for you.
Transgender’s have an underlying mental illness — see the book “Trans Life Survivor” by Walt Heyer
There is no such thing as gender change or sex change — neutering is what it really amounts to (unless you are a female transgender with male sex organs who continues to impregnate women).
There is no such thing as gender dysphoria which the Mayo clinic describes as the feeling of discomfort or distress that might occur in people whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth or sex related physical characteristics. There is only dysphoria or a state of unease or generalized dissatisfaction with life/ Is this a good reason for a person to change their sex either mentally by affirmation and/or with surgery ?
The goal of the LGBTQMxyz community is to feminize, emasculate and in some cases mutilate boys/men while pushing “toxic masculinity” and to masculate or in many cases mutilate girls/women.
The left’s and WOKE societies push for the LGBTQMxyz narrative has traction partially because they are disciples of the notion that if you own the language you own the narrative.
Here’s some of the language used that we should be aware of and dispute that feeds the LGBTQMxyz narrative:
Gender Identity Disorder
Gender Affirming
Gender Assignment at Birth
Transgender
Nonbinary person
Gender Neutral
LGBTQQIAAPP persons make up less than 3% of population yet the media & leftists in Congress have given them power & influence way beyond what they should have.
LGBTQQIAAP stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, Allies and Pansexual, with all laying under the umbrella of Queer.
Lesbian means women that are attracted to women.
Gay means men that are attracted to men.
Bisexual means men or women that are attracted to both men and women.
Transgender means anyone whose gender identity, expression or behavior differs from the sexual identity of their biological birth.
Questioning means anyone who is in question towards their gender identity.
Queer refers to a non-straight person, and is hence an umbrella term for the non-straights.
Intersex means a person that is born with both male and female biological features.
Asexual means a person that is not sexually attracted to others, but it doesn’t mean they do not fall in love with others, they can be attracted by someone, just that they do not have to need to act it out sexually. Some asexual people are happier on their own, others are happiest with a group of close friends. Other asexual people have a desire to form more intimate romantic relationships, and will date and seek long-term partnerships. Asexual people are just as likely to date sexual people as we are to date each other. Also, there are different kinds of asexuality such as grey-asexual, someone who has sexual attractions very rarely, and demi-sexual, which is someone who only feels sexual attractions for someone after already developing a strong bond with them. For some sexual arousal is a fairly regular occurrence, though it is not associated with a desire to find a sexual partner or partners. Some will occasionally masturbate, but feel no desire for partnered sexuality. Other asexual people experience little or no arousal. It is because they do not care about sex, asexual people generally do not see a lack of sexual arousal as a problem to be corrected, and focus their energy on enjoying other types of arousal and pleasure.
Allies (or Allied) means straight people that are supportive to the LGBT(QQIAAP) community.
Pansexual means people that are attracted to others with gender not a factor being considered.
Pansexual people are often mixed up with bisexual people as they both may date both men or women. Gender of another person is not important to pansexual people as they are attracted solely to the person himself/herself and the gender does not contribute to the attraction.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-12-14 14:41:472022-12-15 14:56:09Cambridge Dictionary’s New Definition of a ‘Woman’ and ‘Man’
The State of Florida is subpoenaing nearly two dozen medical and academic organizations that have pushed transgender sex change treatments onto children as part of an ongoing lawsuit against a new Medicaid rule.
The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) subpoenaed 20 organizations in November to obtain information about their internal decision-making and leadership structure for pushing hormone treatments and transgender surgeries on minors, the Daily Caller has learned. The organizations signed onto a lawsuit against the state, which implemented a new rule in August to no longer cover “gender-affirming” care with Medicaid.
“Gender-affirming” care is a euphemism for treatments and procedures that facilitate sex changes, like hormone treatments or sex change surgeries.
Transgender rights groups are suing Florida over its Medicaid ban on gender-affirming care.
Their argument: the ban violates the federal equal protection clause & prevents an estimated 9,000 state Medicaid enrollees from receiving gender-affirming care.https://t.co/aBnHK5UfdH
Activists filed a preliminary injunction request against the rule, but a federal judge denied the request in October. Judge Robert Hinkle ruled that the question at hand was one for the Medicaid statute, not the Constitution.
The organizations being subpoenaed by the AHCA include the American Pediatric Association, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, Pediatric Endocrine Society, Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine and Yale University.
Yale is included in the list, despite being an educational institution and not a medical organization, due to the involvement of Yale professors in pushing against the new rule. All 20 of the organizations being subpoenaed have either promoted or employ individuals who promote “gender-affirming” care for minors.
Court documents show that the AHCA wants information on those organizations’ stance on “gender-affirming” care, policies adopted to treat gender dysphoria, side effects associated with those policies and treatments, how the organizations are organized and how many of their members voted to support those policies and why the organizations wanted to file an amicus brief in the Florida case.
The formal request includes documents related to membership deliberations, gender dysphoria and “gender-affirming” care and the Florida lawsuit, Dekker v. Marstiller.
The plaintiffs in the suit have argued that the new Medicaid rule violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Two of the four plaintiffs that the suit was filed on behalf of are 12-year-old children. For now, Florida is now one of ten states that does not cover sex-change treatments under Medicaid.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-12-14 14:08:312022-12-14 15:03:12EXCLUSIVE: Florida Subpoenas Organizations Pushing Transgender Care On Children In Lawsuit
